Loading...
1967/07/31 City Council Minutes (3)Upon motion by Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman C. Smith and unanimously approved, the Council appointed Councilman V. Smith as their representative to contact the Cotati City Council to determine if they would be interested in discussing annexation to Rohnert Park. 1967 -68 Budget A work session was held concerning the 1967 -68 budget. Mr. Maurice Fredericks, President of the Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce was present at the invi- tation of the City Council and discussed the Chamber's request for funds and also the Chamber's program for fiscal year 196768® Discussion was also held concerning the advisability of the City entering into a contract with the Chamber of Commerce for the Chamber to handle the City's advertising and promotion matters. Councilman V. Smith suggested that the City Manager, City Attorney and the President of the Chamber of Commerce get together and prepare an explicit program for the Chamber's use of City funds and which would also provide for the Chamber handling those promotional activities that the City would like to see conducted. Upon motion by Councilman C. Smith, seconded by Councilman Rogers and unanimously approved, the funds earmarked for the Chamber of Commerce in the preliminary budget were changed to $2,080.00 ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL MINUTES July 31, 1967 The Council of the City of Rohnert Park met this date in an adjourned session at 8 :30 P.M. at the City Offices, 435 Southwest Boulevard, Rohnert Park, California with Mayor Pezonella presiding. Call to Order Mayor Pezonella called the meeting to order. Roll Call Present: (5) Councilmen Roberts, Rogers, C.Smith V.Smith and Mayor Pezonella Absent: (0) None Staff present: City Manager Callinan Meeting with City Manager Callinan reported that- the joint Cotati session with the Cotati City Council scheduled for 7 :30 P.M. this evening had been cancelled at the request of the City of Cotati due to the fact that several of their councilmen were not in town A discussion wa3 held concerning Rohnert Park's relations with Cotati and the possibility of Cotati considering annexation to Rohnert Park. Upon motion by Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman C. Smith and unanimously approved, the Council appointed Councilman V. Smith as their representative to contact the Cotati City Council to determine if they would be interested in discussing annexation to Rohnert Park. 1967 -68 Budget A work session was held concerning the 1967 -68 budget. Mr. Maurice Fredericks, President of the Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce was present at the invi- tation of the City Council and discussed the Chamber's request for funds and also the Chamber's program for fiscal year 196768® Discussion was also held concerning the advisability of the City entering into a contract with the Chamber of Commerce for the Chamber to handle the City's advertising and promotion matters. Councilman V. Smith suggested that the City Manager, City Attorney and the President of the Chamber of Commerce get together and prepare an explicit program for the Chamber's use of City funds and which would also provide for the Chamber handling those promotional activities that the City would like to see conducted. Upon motion by Councilman C. Smith, seconded by Councilman Rogers and unanimously approved, the funds earmarked for the Chamber of Commerce in the preliminary budget were changed to $2,080.00 July 319 1967 with the extra $80/00 being transferred from the Miscellaneous category of the Community Promotion Preliminary Budget. Education Incen- City Manager Callinan discussed employee educa- tive Programs tion incentive programs that might be proposed in Rohnert Park. He reviewed the attendance by City employees at course at Sonoma State College and Santa Rosa Junior College, dur the 1966 -67 fiscal year. He explained that it has been a City policy to encourage employees to take courses on their own time with the City paying for the tuition and books for approved courses. A discussion followed during which the City approved in concept the implementation of an edu- cation incentive program. The indicated that they looked forward with interest to the sub- mission of a detailed education incentive pro- gram for enactment at some future date. City Manager Callinan was also requested, in prepar- ing an education incentive program, to develop a program that would promote the objectives of education insofar as the City is concerned. Councilman C. Councilman C. Smith left the meeting at this Smith departure point, the time being approximately 9s30P.Me 1967 -68 Salaries City Manager Callinan reviewed his memo to the City Council dated July 31, 1967, a copy of which is attached to these minutes, in which he recommended salaries for fiscal year 1967 -68. The Council reviewed in detail and discussed the recommendations included in City Manager Callinan's memo. Councilman Rogers Councilman Rogers left the meeting at this Departure point, the time being approximately 10.-00 P.M. Further discussion was held concerning the pro- posed 1967 -68 fiscal year salaries. Upon motion by Councilman Roberts, seconded by Councilman V. Smith and unanimously approved, the Council accepted the budget and salary recommendations of the City Manager and adopted the salaries for fiscal year 1967 -68 as outlined in the City Manager's memo with the new salaries going into effect August 1, 1967. Preliminary Budget Upon motion by Councilman V. Smith, seconded by Approval Councilman Roberts and unanimously approved, the CH ty Counc i 1 gazre tentative apprnSral to -h:Yie preliminary budget and directed the City Manager to prepare the final budget for fiscal year 1967 -68 in lime with the feelings of the Council Page -3- July 31, 1967 expressed in the budget work sessions and in keeping with the City Council policy of levying a $1.00 property tax rate. Chamber of Councilman Roberts expressed appreciation to Commerce the Council on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce for the Council's earlier action in the meeting in expressing a willingness to appropriate a sizeable amount of funds to the Chamber and also to work out a cooperative program with the Chamber. Adjournment There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 10 :55 P.M. J r f Acting Secretary APPROVED: �J Ma or oseph Pe- e a fr ATTEST: Cty--Cle k SUBJECT: Salary Recommendations Listed below are the salary recommendations for the 1967 -68 fiscal year: Classification Title CLERICAL Account Clerk Admin. Secty. Police Clerk PUBLIC SAFETY Director"° Officers PUBLIC WORKS } 11 $410 $500 11 410 500 10 390 476 21 $670 $815 15 500 608 Recommended Range 'FirsT Last Step Step 17A $420 $513 17A 420 513 17 400 488 28A $725 $885 23 552 673 -'Director 21 $670 $815 28A $725 $885 Maint. Man II 12 500 608 21A 513 625 Maint. Man I 15 431 525 19A 464 566 Maint. Trainee 4 290 353 10A 297 362 BUILDING INSPECTION Inspec or N/A -4 $325 N/A - $345 MANAGEMENT City Manager N/A - $1050 N/A - $1200 In making these recommendations the following sources of data were used: 1. League of California Cities - Salaries and Working Conditions Survey January 1967. 2. Sonoma County Community Salary Survey - January 1967. 3. Survey of Sonoma County Cities - July 1967• 4. Discussion with County of Sonoma Civil Service Dept. 5. City of Santa Rosa's Salaries adopted for 1967 -68. Enclosed is a copy of the new salary ranges proposed as is a copy of the salary ranges presently in effect. The recommended sa,la.r_yra.nge has many more ranges than our present one and will permit the ad- justing of salaries for a 2.5% increase in cost of living. COMMENTS ON RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Clerical - The salaries recommended for the Account Clerk and the Administrative Secreterial positions represent a 2.5% in- crease over last year's rate to cover the increase in cost of living. The salaries being paid these positions compare favor- ably with the salaries paid to similar positions in neighboring cities. For example, the Account Clerk in the City of Sebasto- pol has a top salary of $441 and in Petaluma the Chief Clerk has a top salary of $499. The highest paid secretary in Sebastopol receives $518 and a Steno III, which is a highly rated secreterial position in Petaluma, has a top of $481 per month. In discussing these positions with the County Civil Service Department it was generally felt that they would be comparable to Stenographer III in the County which has a range of $415 -$505. Thus it would appear that the rates set for these positions by Griffenhagen- Kroeger last year were realistic. They are being adjusted at this time merely for cost of living increase. The Police Clerk position also compares favorabley with similar positions throughout the County and the pay rate for said posi- tion is being adjusted 2.5% to reflect the cost of living in- crease. 2. Public Safer Significant adjustment in salaries for Public Sa`f`e �y personnel are being recommended. This is to bring our department in line with salaries paid to more progressive de- partments in the County and also to reflect the emphasis that should be placed on retaining qualified law enforcement personnel. The Director position is being recommended for a pay range of $725 -$885. This is slightly more than the pay range for Police Lieutenant in the City of Santa Rosa ($707 -$863) and the Lieu- tenant in the Sheriff's Department ($710- $862). I feel that there is ample justification for this pay range being recommended primarily because of the complexity of the Director of Public Safety's position. Whether you are in a small town or a large town the Director of Public Safety (that is our Police Chief and Fire Chief) must be familiar and abreast of all laws and situations that might arise in law enforcement. I feel that the Lieutenant's position in the City of Santa Rosa and the County Sheriff's Department is comparable to our Director of Public Safety position, especially since our Director of Public Safety Position encompasses, in addition to the Police Depart- ment, the Fire Department, Civil Defense, Ambulance, and Animal Control. The pay range being recommended for Public Safety Officers is $552 -$673• This range is slightly more than the pay rate for police officers in the City of Santa Rosa and somewhat less than Deputy Sheriff II positions in the County of Sonoma ($556 -676). There may be some who feel that police officers in Santa Rosa or the County of Sonoma should receive more than the Rohnert Park police officers. I have reflected on this matter for quite a while and I have come to the conclusion and conviction that such an assumption is a false one. For instance, if an officer has to break up a family f °fight, be it in Santa Rosa or Rohnert Park, he is faced with the same problem as his fellow officer in a neighboring city. In our department, due to the small force, our officers are required to do considerable amount of investi- gation and follow up work, including report writing and court testimony that I am sure the average patrolman in the larger cities, such as Santa Rosa, do not have to do. The reason for this is ofcourse, where we have one officer on duty he is expose& to all the incidents and occurrences that take place during his tour of duty. In addition with only one Chief officer in the department, our officers are required to be on their own and without immediate supervision at their disposal much more than officers in the larger departments where there is generally always a police sergeant and police lieutenant on duty and available for instruction. 3. Public Works - The Director of Public Works position is being recommended for pay range 28A $725 -$885 which is the same pay range being recommended for the Director of Public Safety. In discussing this position with the County Civil Service Depart- ment it was felt that the position bears some correlation to the Building Superintendent position that the County has for the County Administration Center and also the County Hospital. The County Building Superintendents receive $810 -$862. It was difficult to pick a position in the Santa Rosa classification that might compare to our Superintendent of Public Works. The reason for this is that Santa Rosa has separate superintendents for water, sewer, street, etc. Realizing that our Public Works Department has to operate, maintain water system, sewer system, streets, drainage, parks and pools, as well as inspect all new improvements going in, review and comment on improvement plans submitted to the City both by our own City Engineer and also engineers for subdividers, etc., it would appear that the scope of responsibility assigned to our Superintendent of Public Works is somewhat higher than that assigned to the Building Superin- tendent at the County level. Thus I have increased by one range the salary recommended for our Superintendent of Public Works over that of the Building Superintendent for the County position. The Maintenance Man II position is being recommended for a salary range of $513 -$625. The adjustment in this position represents a 2.5% increase over last year's pay rate to reflect increased cost of living. The pay rate assigned to this position appears to compare favorably with that paid skilled maintenance men in other cities in the County and also the County of Sonoma. The Maintenance Man I position is being recommended for a sig- nificant range adjustment to range 19A $464 -$566. The reason fox this recommended adjustment is to bring the pay scale for this position more in line with that which neigboring cities pay for equipment operators, specifically, street sweepers. For example, the City of Santa Rosa pays equipment operators $500 -610 and Petaluma pays a sweeper operator $464 -$564. Our Maintenance Man I position, in addition to operating the street sweeper on one day a week, is also required to be able to operate other equipment such as loaders, tractors with attachments, dump trucks, etc., as we:;:l as required to demonstrate some skill in the maintenance and repair of equipment in our pools, water system, sewer system, etc. The Maintenance Trainee position is being adjusted to reflect 2.5% cost of living increase. 4. Bulldin Inspection - The pay rate for the Building Inspector at present is $325 per month which was set in November of 1965. No adjustment has been made in the inspector's pay rate since that time because of the building slow -down. However, I am recommending a pay rate adjustment for the position to $345 which is equal to one --half the middle step of the rate paid Building Inspectors in the City of Santa Rosa. Here again, I think that this would be justified, since our Building Inspec- tor is not only a field inspector, he is the chief inspector and handles all the paper work and reports connected with Building Inspection. In addition he must inspect all phases of construction, that is electrical, plumbing and building and not specialize in any one area. 5. City Manager er - It �be set at 1200 p, tant City Manager City Manager's in Rosa: Petaluma - Sebastopol - $950 is suggested that the City Manager's pay rate ar month. This is the pay rate of the Assis- in the City of Santa Rosa. Pay rates of other the County are as follows, exclue(i.ng Santa $1500 per month; Sonoma - $1080 per month; per month. Although the Petaluma Manager receives a $1500 per month salary it should also be kept in mind that he has complete staff at his disposal, that is he has Director of Finance, Planning Director, Assistant City Manager, etc. The Sonoma pay scale for the Manager a few years lagged Rohnert Park's, now it is ahead based on the present pay rate. In addition, the City of Sonoma has a full aray of department heads, that is Police Chief, Fire Chief, Building Inspector, and Director of Public Works on a full time basis with not quite as much development activity as Rohnert Park. W C ()A) 7 The City Manager of Sebastopol receives $950, although he has an Assistant City Manager of sorts in the Director of Finance who handles all the fiscal detail and assists the manager in special studies and /or projects. In addition, Sebastopol's activity in the form of new projects and programs is no where near that of Rohnert Park. In discussing relative duties with these other managers, it is m; opinion that the Rohnert Park City Manager position perhaps has the most complex aray of duties of any of the managers with the exception of possibly Petaluma and Santa Rosa where their complexity is somewhat off -set by the large staff at their dis- posal. Rohnert Park is continually embarking on new programs and getting into various new areas of development which re- quires a manager to continually negotiate and discuss contracts and agreements with other entities, subdividers, developers, etc. for such things as the golf course, expressway, CATV, prepare new ordinances and programs, etc. in addition to overseeing the day to day administration of the City. Additional comments and all information that I have at my disposal will be at the disposal of the City Council during the work session held to discuss salaries and wages. (Salary Range an(i Step Scheciul,e -- continued) Range 1-fourly Nui-xi ber E uivaleot Ist 3w. 2nd su-�p aril step 4 th Step sth step 21 2.885 500 526 552 580 610 21-A 2.960 513 539 566 595 625 22 K035 526 552 580 610 641 22A 3,110 539 566 595 625 657 23 V185 552 580 Mo 641 673 23A 3,265 566 595 625 057 690 24 3346 580 NO X41.. 67• '707 247 3,433 595 625 657 690 '725 25 3.519 610 641 673 707 743 25A 3. M6 615 657 690 725 762 26 3.698 641 673 707 743 781 ZOO 657 690 725 762 801 27 3•383 673 707 743 781 821 27A 3.91 8 1 690 7 2,"--,1 762 801 842 28 C079 707 743 781 821 863 28A 4.183 725 762 801 842 885 29 4386 743 781 821 863 907 2TA 4096 •62 801 842 885 930 3() V506 781 821 863 907 953 30A 4 . b2 J, 801 842 885 930 9 7 "i" 3 1, 4.736 821 863 907 953 1, 000 31..A 4.857 842 885 930 977 1,025 32 4. 9 7 ") 863 907 951 1,000 1,050 5 2 A 5 1 (v 885 UM j! 'n 1 fy?n 1 ; w